Bob reports:
1. Motion for Reconsideration rejected.
2. Details at Cambridge Chronicle.
3. Cambridge City Council getting in to the act.
1. Motion for Reconsideration rejected.
Cambridge filed is motion for reconsideration on May 19. The Court filed its response yesterday:
*****
Motion (P#121) Upon review of all submissions and relevant case law,
the within mtoion for reconsideration is DENIED. (Bonnie H. MacLeod,
Justice). Notices mailed 5/21/2009
*****
2. Details at Cambridge Chronicle.
The Cambridge Chronicle apparently has received a copy of some of the papers on which my knowledge is limited to paper titles. Its report may be read at: http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x542611448/Judge-rules-against-city-Attempt-to-appeal-discrimination-case-moot
Take care, however. The report is simplified for public consumption and, as a result, lacks legal perfection. Additionally, there are legal points which the Chronicle does not seem to understand. To the extent anything in the report conflicts with my reports, my reports should prevail.
3. Cambridge City Council getting in to the act.
The Chronicle report included city council discussion of the matter.
That came from a city council order signed by five members (a voting majority) which is published at http://www.cambridgema.gov/cityClerk/PolicyOrder.cfm?item_id=25451. This order directly addresses the Monteiro case. It was tabled and would not normally be brought up until a week from Monday.
The initial order called for money to hire special council to evaluate the situation and for closed door discussion WITHOUT THE CITY MANAGER.
A modification order from Toomey reports that the city council has already met with special council.
